USGS ScienceSearch

USGS · 70251538

Multi-criteria decision approach for climate adaptation of cultural resources along the Atlantic coast of the southeastern United States: Application of AHP method

Abstract

Prioritizing climate adaptation actions is often made difficult by stakeholders and decision-makers having multiple objectives, some of which may be competing. Transparent, transferable, and objective methods are needed to assess and weight different objectives for complex decisions with multiple interests. In this study, the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) was used to examine priorities in managing cultural resources in the face of climate change at Cape Lookout National Seashore on the Atlantic coast of the southeastern United States. In this process, we conducted facilitated discussion sessions with the selected stakeholder representatives to elicit a comprehensive list of management objectives. Objectives were then merged into three categories: 1) Maximize retention of historic character and condition (HCC); 2) Foster heritage awareness (HA); and 3) Maximize financial benefits (FB). We facilitated two AHP exercise sessions, both individually and in groups, to seek consensus on the relative importance of the objectives. The AHP process created a space for stakeholders (government agencies and local citizens) to consider and present arguments that we used to contextualize their trade-offs between the objectives. The stakeholders' top priority was to maximize the HCC. This objective was prioritized more than HA and FB in the individual trade-off choices, while HA was given nearly equal priority to FB. The consensus priority vectors of two management objectives (HCC and HA) differ significantly from FB, but the difference between HCC and HA is slight and not statistically different. FB and HA had larger changes in consensus priority vectors among the three objectives relative to individual priority vectors. For HCC, the difference between individual and consensus priority vectors was the smallest and nearly equal. Moreover, very high levels of consistency were found in consensus priority trade-off discussions and AHP application. Our research highlights the advantage of using a two-step AHP process in climate adaptation planning of vulnerable resources to enhance robustness in decision making. Coupling this approach with future efforts to develop management priorities would help estimate indices to determine the order in which adaptation treatments are applied to vulnerable cultural resources.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Abu SMG Kibria, Erin Seekamp, Xiao Xiao, Soupy Dalyander, Mitchell J. Eaton. 2024. Multi-criteria decision approach for climate adaptation of cultural resources along the Atlantic coast of the southeastern United States: Application of AHP method. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crm.2024.100587

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Exposure of cultural resources to 21st-century climate change: Towards a risk management plan

Anthropogenic climate change during the 21st century presents a significant challenge to the protection of cultural resources (CRs) on federal lands that encompass ∼ 28% of the U.S. In particular, CRs on this land base may be adversely affected by a wide range of climate-change hazards, including damage by sea-level rise, enhanced deterioration by increasing temperature and precipitation, and destruction by more-frequent and severe wildfire. Most current measures to manage the impacts of hazards on CRs use vulnerability assessments, but because these require that all CRs be treated as having an equal chance of being affected by climate-change hazards (i.e., equal exposure) across large landscapes, the cost and resources required for such analyses are overwhelming to land management agencies. Projections of changes in many hazards, however, show that the probability of hazard occurrence will be unevenly distributed on the landscape. Incorporating this information into a risk assessment thus allows CR managers to prioritize their efforts on assessing impacts to CRs in those areas where the probability of the hazard is greatest, thus increasing efficiency. We provide several heuristic examples of implementing the first part of a CR risk assessment by using 21st-century projections of several hazards most likely to adversely affect CRs on nine National Forests (NFs) managed by the U.S. Forest Service in northern Idaho and Montana. Overlaying the projected distribution of hazards on these NFs with the distribution of CRs identifies CR exposure that, with information on their vulnerability, is required to determine risk. Additional policy and field studies will be needed to determine how to prioritize those CRs that are most at risk according to their significance as well as identify how impacts can be reduced and managed through adaptation planning and implementation. Adaptation will follow the iterative risk management process particularly by improving projection resolution. Finer scale, process-based modeling informed by the highest priority CRs would also provide a means to assess various adaptation options that might change the estimated risk and increase the odds of CRs being as little affected as possible.

Idaho, Montana

Grounding simulation models with qualitative case studies: Toward a holistic framework to make climate science usable for US public land management

Policies directing agencies and public land managers to incorporate climate change into management face several barriers. These stem, in part, from a disconnect between the information that is produced and the information needs of local resource managers. A disproportionate focus on the natural and physical sciences in climate vulnerability and adaptation assessment obscure understandings of complex social systems and the interactions and feedbacks in social-ecological systems. We use a qualitative case study of bison management on Department of the Interior-managed and tribal lands to explore how a social-science driven Determinants and Analogue Vulnerability Assessment (DAVA) can inform ecological response models, specifically simulation models that account for multiple drivers of change. First, we illustrate how a DAVA approach can help to: 1) identify key processes, entities, and interactions across scales; 2) document local impacts, indicators, and monitoring efforts of drought and climate; and 3) identify major tradeoffs and uncertainties. We then demonstrate how qualitative narratives can inform simulation models by: 1) prioritizing model components included in modeling efforts; 2) framing joint management and climate scenarios; and 3) parameterizing and evaluating model performance. We do this by presenting a conceptual joint agent-based/state-and-transition simulation modeling framework. Simulation models can represent multiple interacting variables and can identify surprising, emergent outcomes that might not be evident from qualitative analysis alone, and we argue that qualitative case studies can ground simulation models in local contexts and help make them more structurally realistic and useful. Together, these can provide a step toward developing actionable climate change adaptation strategies.

Climate Risk Management

Multiple methods for multiple futures: Integrating qualitative scenario planning and quantitative simulation modeling for natural resource decision making

Scenario planning helps managers incorporate climate change into their natural resource decision making through a structured “what-if” process of identifying key uncertainties and potential impacts and responses. Although qualitative scenarios, in which ecosystem responses to climate change are derived via expert opinion, often suffice for managers to begin addressing climate change in their planning, this approach may face limits in resolving the responses of complex systems to altered climate conditions. In addition, this approach may fall short of the scientific credibility managers often require to take actions that differ from current practice. Quantitative simulation modeling of ecosystem response to climate conditions and management actions can provide this credibility, but its utility is limited unless the modeling addresses the most impactful and management-relevant uncertainties and incorporates realistic management actions. We use a case study to compare and contrast management implications derived from qualitative scenario narratives and from scenarios supported by quantitative simulations. We then describe an analytical framework that refines the case study’s integrated approach in order to improve applicability of results to management decisions. The case study illustrates the value of an integrated approach for identifying counterintuitive system dynamics, refining understanding of complex relationships, clarifying the magnitude and timing of changes, identifying and checking the validity of assumptions about resource responses to climate, and refining management directions. Our proposed analytical framework retains qualitative scenario planning as a core element because its participatory approach builds understanding for both managers and scientists, lays the groundwork to focus quantitative simulations on key system dynamics, and clarifies the challenges that subsequent decision making must address.

Climate Risk Management